please do as attached
There will be two parts to this exam, each worth 50% of your exam score.
Part I
Choose five pairs of terms from this list:
Comintern
National Youth Welfare Act (German)
Putilov factory
Strength through Joy
Kadets
Kronstadt Uprising
Zhenotdel
Law for the Protection of the People and
the State
Socialist Realism
Bla Kun
Leon Blum
Magnitogorsk
Law for the Prevention of Hereditary
Diseases
Fasci femminili
Friedrich Ebert
Freikorps
Wolfgang Kapp
Lateran Treaty
Horseshoe Settlement
Ramsay MacDonald
Nuremberg Laws
For each pair:
1) Explain what each term meant/was, and when and where it was significant (3 points).
2) Explain how the two terms are related (2 points). The two terms may be examples of
the same phenomenon in different countries; or they may be examples of opposing sides
in a particular struggle (war, policy debate, philosophical difference, etc.); or one may
follow from the other as effect follows from cause; or there may be some other
relationship that you discern.
3) Explain what larger trends or developments these terms illustrate or exemplify (5
points). Usually, this will mean making a connection between these terms in their
national context(s) and broader European trends.
Please note:
You answers will be assigned up to ten points each.
do NOT get sidetracked into narrative or factual detail regarding each term! Use
facts regarding each term and the broader European context to support your
interpretation.
Each answer should be NO LONGER THAN 200 WORDS.
Part II
Write a short essay that answers ONE of the following two questions:
EITHER
1. Did violence, or did innovation (destruction, or creation) generate the more important
discontinuities in European history between the middle of the nineteenth century and the
early twentieth century (say 1939)?
OR
2. Were the most important continuities in European history between 1870s and 1930
created by stability (things that did not change), or were they instead continuing
processes of change?
This essay should be a focused brief argument for a particular interpretive standpoint. It
should not be a data-dump. Nevertheless, you must use concrete examples to support
your argument.
PLEASE NOTE that your response must address BOTH violence and creativity (question
1) or BOTH stability and change (question 2), explaining why you view one or the other
as more important.
PLEASE NOTE that you do not have to give an either/or answeryou might instead
choose to discuss the relationships between innovation and violence (question 1), or
between stasis and change (question 2).
Your response should be NO LONGER THAN 1,000 WORDS, and no shorter than
750 words.
Policy on Collaboration:
Your work on this exam should be your own; that is to say, you should write the exam,
not cut and paste answers. If you wish to collaborate with others by discussing terms, or
discussing potential argument and evidence for the essay, that is fine. Answers that are
verbatim identical with at least one other student’s answers will be discounted.
I have adopted this policy because it is in the best interest of students in the course. In
past years, exam scores for students who sought to save time by sharing/cutting and
pasting answers were significantly lower than for students who wrote their own exams.
In other words, sharing cut-and-pasted answers may save a little bit of time, but it results
in lower grades . . . and of course inferior learning outcomes.
